How can anyone argue Philly is more urban than San Francisco? (crime rate, homicide)

[kidphilly]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

Well, so much of this conversation has been about Oakland(my fault I guess(LOL)), that I totally forgot to compare Philly to the City itself.

Anyway, here's the Top 5 neighborhoods of each city:

Top 5 Philadelphia Neighborhoods
Combined Area: 1.066 sq. miles
Combined Population: 34,320
Population Per Square Mile: 32,195

Top 5 SF Neighborhoods
Combined Area: 1.421 sq. miles
Combined Population: 78,110
Population Per Square Mile: 54,968

I have got to dig up the new 2010 data. the numbers here are off a bit though SF will still hold a higher density these numbers are off. This is the area that grew by 24% since last census.

This link has some but i need to find the one that goes into greater neighborhood detail.

The 2010 Census | Philly

[slo1318]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

Some of these neighborhood names might be off, but Im confident that the densities are correct.

So I did some research using city-data.com-using SFs current population density of 17,127 as a benchmark, I compiled a list of neighborhoods in each city that had densities in excess of 17,127 persons per square mile and here are the results:

Philadelphia
Neighborhood, Population/Area in Sq Miles/Population Density
Antique Row, 1,002/0.027/37,402
Gayborhood, 4,356/0.118/37,009
Powelton Village, 4,996/0.156/32,108
South Philadelphia, 22,053/0.702/31,414
Financial District, 1,913/0.063/30,274
Spruce Hill, 8,289/0.274/30,215
Rittenhouse, 19,917/0.665/29,938
Dickinson Narrows, 5,513/0.188/29,273
Washington Square, 12,372/0.426/29,044
Newbold, 13,106/0.463/28,295
Restaurant Row, 183/0.007/28,133
East Passyunk Crossing, 8,188/0.306/26,753
Penn Campus Shopping/West Philly 5,522/0.210/26,275
3rd St Fabric Row, 139/.006/25,019
Point Breeze, 25,689/1.054/24,547
Girard Estate, 10,157/0.414/24,508
Harrowgate, 16,681/0.699/23,878
Avenue of the Arts, 393/0.017/23,750
Passyunk Square, 11,608/0.500/23,196
Filter Square, 4,694/0.203/23,100
Fairmount, 5,918/0.259/22,826
Chestnut Street, 595/.026/22,505
Bella Vista, 4,456/.200/22,284
Wharton, 24,742/1.089/22,728
Garden Court, 7,695/0.347/22,204
Carroll Park, 12,733/0.588/21,652
Cedar Park, 15,755/0.717/21,988
Spring Garden, 6,715/0.312/21,552
Center City West, 26,037/1.203/21,642
Haddington, 27,138/1.275/21,285
Bainbidge St Booksellers Row, 765/.036/21,202
Cobbs Creek, 40,433/1.979/20,431
Oregon Av Discount Shopping, 1,477/0.072/20,430
Fairhill, 28,456/1.415/20,112
63rd St Discount Shopping, 1,777/.091/19,558
Society Hill, 6,413/0.330/19,429
Baring, 13,721/0.708/19,392
Southwest Center City, 9,816/0.508/19,325
Queen Village, 6,038/0.313/19,312
Italian Market, 2,424/0.126/19,240
Penn Center, 1,386/0.073/18,869
Passyunk Discount Shopping, 772/0.041/18,743
The Badlands, 5,349/0.288/18.586
Walnut Hill, 5,678/0.312/ 18,204
Squirrel Hill, 6,611/0.366/18,052
South Street, 1,092/0.061/17,831
Fairmount, 21,329/1.232/17,309
Olney, 37,253/2.109/17.667
Brewerytown, 11,966/.694/17,249
West Oak Lane, 39,254/2.277/17,236

San Francisco
Neighborhood, Population/Area in Sq Miles/Population Density
Little Saigon, 985/0.012/83,075
Tenderloin, 24,913/ 0.350/ 71,254
Chinatown, 13,103/0.212/61,897
Lower Nob Hill, 18,713/0.344/54,467
Nob Hill, 20,396/0.395/51,694
Downtown San Francisco, 21,021/0.426/49,335
Telegraph Hill, 8,275/0.215/38,513
NOMA, 72,484/1,974/36,724
Mint Hill, 2,762/0.080/34,348
Polk Gulch, 3,195/0.094/33,955
North Beach, 20,193/0.620/32,594
The Hub(Mid Market), 2,684/0.085/31,633
Hayes Valley, 5,698/0.180/31,619
Deco Ghetto, 2,881/0.092/31,220
Mission Dolores, 10,846/0.352/30,839
Alamo Square, 5,573/0.181/30,815
Lower Haight, 9,074/0.298/30,500
Baja Noe, 2,106/0.069/30,334
Transmission, 3,195/0.113/28,317
Western Addition, 12,889/0.463/27,822
Haight-Ashubry, 10,603/0.390/27,207
Russian Hill, 13,361/0.500/26,698
Mission, 47,276/1.876/25,352
Cole Valley, 4,192/0.169/24,737
North Panhandle, 10,049/0.377/24,622
Little Russia, 2,755/0.113/24,308
Lower Pacific Heights, 10,715/0.442/24,242
Inner Richmond, 17,116/0.707/24,223
Sunnydale, 4,592/0.191/23,997
Cathedral Hill, 2,827/0.120/23,592
Central Richmond, 24,785/1.081/22,933
Richmond, 59,324/2.705/21,930
Crocker Amazon, 11,910/0.568/20,971
Duboce Triangle, 3,674/0.178/20,667
Pacific Heights, 21,899/0.967/22,650
Zion, 6,423/0.302/21,253
Cow Hollow, 7,260/0.356/20,422
Inner Sunset, 18,200/0.893/20,386
Lake, 8,297/0.421/19,718
Ingleside, 8,165/0.414/19,715
Outer Mission, 8,410/0.429/19,596
Civic Center, 9,629/0.492/19,566
Castro, 12,594/0.662/19,027
Van Ness, 8,933/0.473/18,871
Bernal Heights South, 15,773/0.842/18,731
Mastro, 2,962/0.158/18,701
Bernal Heights, 24,818/1.320/18,313
Lone Mountain, 7,081/0.386/18,330
Noe Valley, 20,993/1.147/18,308
Bernal Heights North, 8,573/0.470/18,230
Upper Market, 2,911/0.163/17,858
Park Merced, 6,834/0.387/17,648
Silver Terrace, 8,499/0.485/17,535
Excelsior, 23,528/1.350/17,422
Central Sunset, 20,196/1.176/17,171

All Philadelphia Neighborhoods with a Density of 17,129+
Combined Area: 25.545 sq. miles
Combined Population: 544,604
Population Per Square Mile: 21,319

All San Francisco neighborhoods with a density of 17,129+
Combined Area: 29.253 sq. miles.
Combined Population: 655,534
Population Per Square Mile: 22,750

Top 10 Neighborhoods, Philadelphia
Combined Area: 3.082 sq. miles
Combined Population: 93,517
Population Per square Mile: 30,342

Top 10 Neighborhoods, San Francisco
Combined Area: 4.722 sq. miles.
Combined Population: 206,040
Persons Per sqauare Mile: 43,634

Philadelphia Neighborhood Data:
http://www.city-data.com/nbmaps/neig...vania.html#top

San Francisco Neighborhood Data:
http://www.city-data.com/nbmaps/neig...ornia.html#top

So if this data is correct(and I welcome scrutiny cause Id rather have correct data than 'win' some argument), then San Francisco's 29 most dense square miles are more dense than Philadelphia's 25 most dense square miles.

Impressive work.... malo

[kidphilly]

Originally Posted by slo1318

The Bay Area is just a different animal than Philly, but so is New York. There are more physical boundaries that create a unique environment. You wont have a continuous 135 sq miles until you get to San Jose which is 176 sq miles. I can agree, Philly is more contiguous, but that doesnt take away from the Bay at all.
Suburbs are a form of urbanity, whether its here or there its still part of the metro areas.

I agree on the geographic constraints and honestly in ways that is what makes the continuity of urbanity even more significant in Philly.

You reference NY (just on a different scale than either especially Manhattan) Manhattan has mile after mile of 70-100K density (miles of this compared to the top 1.4 sq miles that Montclair references at 55K which is very impressive but very compact and quickly gives way to areas that feel nothing like NY). I would argue Philly on the other hand has a very small (smaller than than SF but can be counted in blocks in both) of Midtown-like but Philly gives way to more a Village feel then gives way to a BK/Queens feel. Both part (actually the biggest part of NY and also both more dense than SF) which extends in Philly with continuity over a much larger footprint. These are the aspects to me that make Philly feel more urban overall.

Also SF even with the contraints yeilds to lower density much quicker on the west bay side. Driving from SFO to the Bay bridge or even across town to the GGB SF feels much smaller in the urban footprint. Just curious if many have driven either the Boulevard or 95 from the Northeast to PHL. This is a 20+ mile stretch of completely unbroken urbanity and feels much closer to driving across BK/Queens than it does SF in both composition and density both developed and population urbanity.

I also feel SF is very urban, no doubt but has always felt very compact when compared to the city of Philly to me. And the East Bay with an urban feel overall feels far less urban than either SF or Philly. Lastly on the burbs point a couple of things that MSA/UA/CSA comparisons miss. The core population of Philly is 2.2 million in the core 200 sq miles and 4.8 million in the core 1,000 sq miles, the density in Philly for either UA or MSA drops significantly outside of this core and includes many exurban areas even in the UA count.

[18Montclair]

Originally Posted by slo1318

Impressive work.... malo

No big. I just added up data from this website. LOL.

Anyway, I found the difference between SF and Philadelphia is most striking at the 30,000+ level.

Philadephia Neighorhoods with a Density of 30,000+ppsm
Combined Area: 1.34 sq. miles
Combined Population: 42,609
Population Per Square Miles: 31,797

San Francisco Neighborhoods with a Density of 30,000+ppsm
Combined Area: 5.979 sq. miles
Combined Population: 244,902
Population Per Square Mile: 40,960

@kidphilly: I hope city-data updates their stats to reflect the 2010 Census asap so we can play with them endlessly. LOL.

[kidphilly]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

No big. I just added up data from this website. LOL.

Anyway, I found the difference between SF and Philadelphia is most striking at the 30,000+ level.

Philadephia Neighorhoods with a Density of 30,000+ppsm
Combined Area: 1.34 sq. miles
Combined Population: 42,609
Population Per Square Miles: 31,797

San Francisco Neighborhoods with a Density of 30,000+ppsm
Combined Area: 5.979 sq. miles
Combined Population: 244,902
Population Per Square Mile: 40,960

@kidphilly: I hope city-data updates their stats to reflect the 2010 Census asap so we can play with them endlessly. LOL.

Yeah me too. I did the manual calculation out to the 5.2 sq miles of Philly for a Pop of 192K and density for this space at a hair under 40K in total based on the 2010 census data. I am also EXTREMLY surprised that Rittenhouse is showing under 30K with the current 2000 data on CD. The neighborhood increased its density by nearly 10K ppsm since the last census (which was below the percentage density increases for the gayborhood, Wash Sq West, or No Libs) and actually impressive on many accounts. Even with the increases SF will be a little more dense but the growth in CC in just the last ten years was very substantial. Also you referenced the Callowhill area (part of this core and also one of your low densisty zips in another post and did see a large boost in the last ten years) But that area (see video below on something new happening in this hood) along with the waterfront finally getting under way combined could add nearly 100K new residents to phillys DT over the next 30 years (Both part of that core 5.2 sq miles already at 30K in total. Your 30K comparison is begging for th new data honestly as this is the area of Philly that has really transformed in the last 10-20 years.


‪Reading Viaduct Promo‬‏ - YouTube

And the waterfront first parts already completed


‪Delaware River Waterfront Corporation opens Philadelphia's newest park, The Race Street Pier.‬‏ - YouTube

Revising strategies on Delaware waterfront - Philly.com

Part of the master plan below (all new residential/commercial/retail)



Far more detail and images below on the development plan

the picture on page 50 shows it better with respect to 95 and Del Ave above
http://www.delawareriverwaterfrontco...port110609.pdf

[slo1318]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

No big. I just added up data from this website. LOL.

Anyway, I found the difference between SF and Philadelphia is most striking at the 30,000+ level.

Philadephia Neighorhoods with a Density of 30,000+ppsm
Combined Area: 1.34 sq. miles
Combined Population: 42,609
Population Per Square Miles: 31,797

San Francisco Neighborhoods with a Density of 30,000+ppsm
Combined Area: 5.979 sq. miles
Combined Population: 244,902
Population Per Square Mile: 40,960

@kidphilly: I hope city-data updates their stats to reflect the 2010 Census asap so we can play with them endlessly. LOL.

Yeah, thats an enormous difference, and frankly thats what it feels like when you are in both cities. Thats no put down to Philly, because its certainly got alot going for it. After New York, I havent been in a city in the United States that feels more dense/lively/vibrant, whatever you want to call it, than San Francisco.

It will be interesting to see where San Francisco goes in the upcoming years. I think the population will continue to inch upward. On the west coast I think LA will continue to urbanize and gain density more quickly.

[kidphilly]

Originally Posted by slo1318

Yeah, thats an enormous difference, and frankly thats what it feels like when you are in both cities. Thats no put down to Philly, because its certainly got alot going for it. After New York, I havent been in a city in the United States that feels more dense/lively/vibrant, whatever you want to call it, than San Francisco.

It will be interesting to see where San Francisco goes in the upcoming years. I think the population will continue to inch upward. On the west coast I think LA will continue to urbanize and gain density more quickly.

Actually re-read the above post really not sure the difference is as dramatic as it was just ten years ago. Phillys core isnt inching either; 24% percent population growth in ten years in the core is pretty substantial.

And Again Slo I have lived in both and call complete BS on where SF nor Philly feels any bit dramatically different from one another. I know you visited a cousin in Philly. I lived in both and NYC (which blows either away on these aspects). I actually wont argue if you want to say SF feels more vibrant than Philly but NYC in this is so FAR ahead of either there is NYC then a long way and more or less Boston/Chicago/Philly/SF on these aspects - they are splitting hairs and none are even close to NYC on these aspects and all far closer to each other than any to NYC.

For the core of Philly it is really quite an exciting time. This is the second 30 plus story condo starting construction in the last 30 days in Rittenhouse alone
http://articles.philly.com/2011-07-2...cago-developer

The orther two blocks away will be a little taller

will see if the ACC ever gets built http://www.acctower.com/

But this is already under construction as well
http://www.pennconnects.upenn.edu/fi...h_overview.php

[slo1318]

Originally Posted by kidphilly

Actually re-read the above post really not sure the difference is as dramatic as it was just ten years ago. Phillys core isnt inching either; 24% percent population growth in ten years in the core is pretty substantial.

And Again Slo I have lived in both and call compete BS on where SF nor Philly feels any bit dramatically different from one another. I know you visited a cousin in Philly. I lived in both and NYC (which blows either away on these aspects). I actually wont argue if you want to say SF feels more vibrant than Philly but NYC in this is so FAR ahead of either there is NYC then a long way and more or less Boston/Chicago/Philly/SF on these aspects - they are splitting hairs and none are even close to NYC on these aspects and all far closer to each other than any to NYC.

Thats all I said....
..its an experience thing, but Montclairs data backs it up.

And unless you "lived there" continuously, then you were just visiting too.
Of course, I havent really studied the nuances of Phillys pop growth, but how has the core grown by 24% if the entire city has only grown by 9,000 since 2000? Even land locked SF grew by about 30,000. Are you saying the core grew, and the rest of the city lost population?

[kidphilly]

Originally Posted by slo1318

Thats all I said....
..its an experience thing, but Montclairs data backs it up.

And unless you "lived there" continuously, then you were just visiting too.
Of course, I havent really studied the nuances of Phillys pop growth, but how has the core grown by 24% if the entire city has only grown by 9,000 since 2000? Even land locked SF grew by about 30,000. Are you saying the core grew, and the rest of the city lost population?

On your last point absolutely many areas (SW, West, North and Northeast) continued to lose population. Philly is growing from the core out again.

Well 18 months living there is not a lifetime (am guessing SIGNIFICANTLY more time than you have spent in Philly) in SF, a little less than the time I lived in NYC and much less than my time in either DC or Philly for that matter. But a lot longer than a week

and on the Montclair data, he is using 2000 data. I did the manual calc of the 5.2 core sq miles of Philly at 38K ppsm vs 41K ppsm for SF, not that DRAMATIC (the word you used I believe) and unless half of that 30K increase for SF is in those core the difference still isnt that dramatic.

On your experience, ok but as a comparator have you lived in NYC for at least 2 years, SF/Philly for at least 18 months? If not I I will argue my EXPERIENCE is far more substantial to make the comparison of Philly to SF, Philly to NYC, or SF to NYC.

On your point I think it was the use of enormous difference in the sentence prior to saying SF being more vibrant; as i said i think they are too close on that aspect to argue too much either way but not an enormous difference as NYC is compared to either.

[thenewtexan]

...because it's more violent.